The panelists said that known sex offenders are only a piece of the problem. They emphasized that only about 2 percent of sexual assaults involve strangers. The vast majority of crimes are committed by persons who are known and trusted, such as family members, friends, neighbors or babysitters. (Anacortes American)

98% of sexual offenses caused by a trusted person!
2% of sexual offenses caused by strangers!

Should the public base decisions, on the media and politicians, or reality?

All citizens should take great exception at the statistic reported in the article by News10 in California. Why? Because it is not true, the U.S. Census statistics do not record statistics related to crime!

All one has to do is to go to their web site and ask the question, as we did, below is the answer we received and how you can check for yourself:

"The state of California lost track of more than 33,000 convicted sex offenders, despite the fact that they are required by law to register," said Reyes, referring to an Associated Press story in January that the state did not know the whereabouts of at least 44% of the ex-convicts required to update their whereabouts at least annually. "That number is astounding. It is my hope this legislation will lower the number of offenders who are not registered, so we can protect our children."

"Her bill is aimed at a loophole that was discovered recently when a convicted sex offender, who had registered in one county, MOVED and registered in another county (registered in two counties?), but then returned to the first county without registering (but lives only in one county). The offender argued in court that California law does not require sex offenders to re-register if they move to a jurisdiction where they once registered. The defendant lost his appeal, but the case showed the law was not explicit about the need for registrants to re-register."

NOTE: Read only the underlined and ask yourself, where are the 33,000 missing offenders, or a good portion of them??? The clues are there, and if you can't figure it out, remember this, "The Loch Ness Monster is a myth!"

8-23-2003 California:Sex offender registry flawed:
(Sean Webby, The Mercury News.com) Here is an article done after the state completed its audit, and it confirms what we have been saying above. Don't blame the offenders, don't try to make it tougher and more confusing on the offenders, when even the people running the show don't know what to do! Start asking, "Why is it no one (especially politicians) grabs the bull by the horns, and fixes the underlying problem?"

9-19-2003 California:Megan's Law needs reform, not extension!
It's understandable that politicians would not want to vote against Megan's Law, a well-meaning but flawed law to track sex offenders in California. That might not be a bad thing. Megan's Law has not proved to be the crime-fighting resource it was made out to be, and we don't blame Republicans for their action.

California has been tracking the activities of sex offenders since 1947, but Megan's Law, in 1996, made the list available to the public. The theory was that anyone could get access to a database in their county of residence and learn the whereabouts of a sex offender or find out if an offender lived near them. The problem was it didn't work.

We can't blame Republicans for not signing off on a program that doesn't deliver what it promises. In fact, it could be detrimental, because it gives the public a false sense of security.
(Editorial: Visalia Times-Delta)

According to Ahern, the total number of sex offenders in the county has tumbled from 1002 in 2001 to 855 this year. He also noted the decline of "serious'' offenders from 806 in 2001 to 698 this year.
But the decreases may reflect record-keeping improvements more than a flight of sex offenders. Ahern attributed the decrease mainly to local law enforcement's improved tracking of offenders, which has established that many have left the county, been deported or died.

"These people like to move, and like to move to other cities, to other counties, to other states, and they also come here,'' Ahern said, adding that convicted sex offenders "are required to register by law and they don't always do what they are supposed to.''
(by Channel 5 Investigates)

NOTE: Notice how the sex offenders are blamed for the record-keeping errors of law enforcement, by saying "they like to move," when in fact the stigma of the registry causes landlords to evict them, moving costs money but this is ignored. "Improved tracking," Hummm, guess thats one way to say "doing the job -the second time-, like it was supposed to be done -the first time-!"

Town officials are concerned that one of the sex offenders apparently lives near two schools. "We're pursuing all avenues and we're going to leave no stone unturned," First Selectman Neil Dupont said Thursday. "We're using all of our resources." Farmer and landlord Blain Kukevitch, along with another individual, owns a three-bedroom cape at 35 Finn Road. It abuts wooded property that is part of the grounds of Canterbury Elementary School and Dr. Helen Baldwin Middle School.

At Tuesday's selectmen meeting, dozens of angry parents protested having a sex offender so close to schools. As a result, selectmen charged Dupont to take legal action.
But according to the Connecticut Department of Public Safety's Sex Offender Registry, a convicted sex offender also lives at 165 N. Canterbury Road, Kukevitch's home address. Kukevitch said he is not collecting rent from the 165 N. Canterbury Road sex offender. He also reiterated his stance that he is a landlord at 35 Finn Road, nothing else. He said the fact that two of Canterbury's four sex offenders live in houses he owns is a "coincidence." "I think the people just needed to do a little more checking before they went running," Kukevitch said.

NOTE:Isn't this article written to scare the public? First "Half the town's" half being "2" while technically correct its inflamatory.

» 10-2-03 Florida: Internet Vigilantes!
Child safety experts say one in five children are contacted for sex online. 70 percent of all convicted sexual offenders use the Internet. While police do what they can to catch them, a group of internet vigilantes has set up their own network, aimed at catching and publicly humiliating those who solicit kids for sex.
(by First Coast News.com)

NOTE: Ridiculous Statistic, designed to incite the public! While 70% MAY BE a correct figure, there is no way anyone could know that, no authority shown; it is a GUESS! Notice that they couple it with the theme "Improper Internet Use," as if to imply that is how the 70% use the Internet. Clearly intended to get headlines no matter who is hurt!

Something interesting was noted by the police, and we quote "The list slowly shrunk, though, as police weeded out repeat names, false addresses and offenders who had died, moved, changed jobs or are in jail. The rest were arrested or turned themselves in."

As you can see, the problems are not ALWAYS the offenders, but the cry goes "ITS THE OFFENDERS!" Why is it that the truth is always withheld by the authorities. Hats off to this reporter for printing what he heard, which I'm sure the police weren't happy about!

NOTE: Oh yes, notice the original list was 140 offenders, but in reality there were only 31. That gives new meaning to "INCORRECT!" I wonder how many homes were being targeted by misinformed community members.

NOTE: If top ten counties are right, then none of the 73 counties can have more than 291 in each of them, but the math works out to 325 per county. Somebody lost track all right, or is this another way to incite the public?
Do they need more manpower or a better adding machine? A review of the Michigan Office of the Auditor General will reveal no audit has ever been done!

Pg 2 of that report shows: "Sex Offender Registration Statistics" as of December 2002: Notice 31,045 total registered sex offenders (that agrees with what they told the newspaper above), BUT, 11,675 of them are incarcerated (still in prison).

What is the purpose of telling the public, every time the police release statistics, about those that are still in prison? They wouldn't be trying to SCARE the public would they?

Technically we should correct our calculations above, but we are going to leave them there as is, so that future readers can see how the state does its best to confuse the public with misinformation!

8-21-2002 Michigan: Today the 6th Cir issued an order permitting the State of Michigan to put its registry back online during the appeal. What is most interesting is, the state added a "NEW Entry Page," a disclaimer page (a similar page is described in the Brief of the Connecticut case now in the US Supreme Court - which probably prompted this new page when the Internet Registry came back up online), which folks must read and accept before being granted access to the full registry.

Disclaimer Page States:"The Michigan State Police (MSP) has established this web site as the official Internet source for Sex Offender Registration information. The Sex Offender Registration open record information is extracted from the MSP Sex Offender Registration database.

The information provided through this web site is public record. It is made available for the purpose of protecting the public. However, it is your responsibility to make sure the records you access through this site pertain to the person about whom you are seeking information. Extreme care should be exercised in using any information obtained from this web site. Neither the MSP nor the state of Michigan shall be responsible for any errors or omissions produced by secondary dissemination of this information. Anyone who uses this information to commit a criminal act against another person is subject to criminal prosecution.
However, information provided by convicted sex offenders is often submitted intentionally in error.

If you believe that any of the information found in these records is in error, or you would like additional information, please contact the local law enforcement agency where the sex offender resides.

NOTE: The BROAD BASED comment "However, information provided by convicted sex offenders is often submitted intentionally in error." is an example of a comment which misleads the public, and further stigmatizes the registrants. Especially given it is broadcast worldwide, and implying (without evidence) that ALL registrants are liars. (Libel/Slander Issue)

Current registry law (Michigan Compiled Law 28.725a(5) and (6)) requires every registrant to bring a valid Driver's License or State ID" and 2 other documents to prove current residence (voter registration, utility bills, or other current bills)" when the registrant comes in every 90 days. The law also requires the official who accepts an initial registration(usually it comes from the sentencing court, the prison, or some other state official, and rarely from a sex offender) to "verify, by state computer, the conviction information."The purpose of the comment is??? You be the judge...

» 9-16 Tennessee: States poor planning puts children in harms way!
Tammie Wilson, with three children to look after, moved into the Apple Tree Apartments in Frayser, because they're across the street from Delano Elementary. Instead...Wilson wound up living near a parole office for sex offenders! The city's newest parole office at 2584 Overton Crossing is right around the corner from Delano.

Using the same device as accident investigators, Action News Five measured the distance. Just 1,442 feet separate the school building from a place where felony sex offenders visit on a daily basis. State law stipulates that a convicted sex offenders cannot live or work within 1000 feet of an elementary school. So technically, at 1442 feet, the parole office isn't breaking any laws.

Representative Jones says state leaders have told him they plan to transfer the sex offenders at that office to other locations in the city.
(by Alisa Nave, WMC-TV)

NOTE:At one point in history there were segregated businesses and public transportation, it appears that same sick logic has returned to now burden a different group. Will government be moving every public building that an offender may use away from schools, day cares, etc.? Or should schools, day cares and the like be built in a prison-like area with fences. When will reason return from exile?

10-24-2003 Utah:
Does this one need further explanation except to say, Halloween is coming to??

» 10-24 Utah: Locked restrooms? What restrooms? Parks lack the facilities to lock, Springville says!
SPRINGVILLE — Should Springville close park restrooms to stop vandals and sexual predators? But what bathrooms? What sexual predators? Those are the questions officials are asking this week when they saw reports about locked bathrooms at city parks.

While the state's sex offender Web site lists 26 registered sex offenders in Springville, police have no record of any sexual assaults in or near a park restrooms in more than a decade, Springville Police Lt. Dave Caron said. Vandalism is rare, but more prevalent, he said.

The story came from a recent City Council discussion about closing restrooms to stop alleged illegal activities. The discussion was theoretical in nature but reported as fact, Long said.
(by Rodger L. Hardy)

NOTE:Isn't it interesting when the politician is a different party than the local police, it must be getting close to election!

6-12-03 Wisconsin: Judge rules that past crimes can be admitted: Waukesha - A jury will be allowed to hear about the past sex crimes of an Arizona registered sex offender now charged in Waukesha County, a judge has ruled. Kenneth Elam, 45, of Mukwonago has asked, through his lawyer, to bar the jury from hearing about his record in Arizona. But Circuit Judge Mark Gempeler ruled last week that Deputy District Attorney Debra Blasius could present the evidence to help show Elam's motive and intent in the Waukesha County case.

NOTE: Given Congress and State Legislatures have enacted "Sex Offender Registration & Community Notification laws," and have personally publicized such actions through their political comments, will those actions be the demise of our future criminal justice system? Will future defendants be able to get a fair trial, or an impartial jury, or an impartial judge not swayed by current public opinion?
Is the "Stigma" that is attaching, the catalyst to erosion of all constitutional rights, sex offenders and others??